Saturday, February 20, 2016

Loan of money is civil in nature; no Estafa.

In the case of PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES vs. RICA G. CUYUGAN, G.R. Nos. 146641-43, November 18, 2002, it was held, inter alia, that when an obligation“is civil in character and in the absence of fraud, no criminal
liability under the Revised Penal Code arises from the mere issuance of
postdated checks as a guarantee of repayment.”

“x x x.

The transaction between
appellant and the Abagat spouses, in our view, was one for a loan of money to be used by
appellant in her business and she issued checks to guarantee the payment of the
loan. As such, she has the obligation to make good the payment of the
money borrowed by her. But such
obligation is civil in character and in the absence of fraud, no criminal
liability under the Revised Penal Code arises from the mere issuance of
postdated checks as a guarantee of repayment. We find appellants
allegation, that the Abagat spouses entered
into ajoint venture
agreement with her for the supply of materials with the AFP, is self-serving. But we also
note that the trial court convicted appellant on a general allegation that all
the elements of estafa under Article 315, 2 (d) of the Revised Penal Code had
been proved by the prosecution without
making any reference to or giving any proof of the actual fraud that appellant
allegedly committed to make her liable for estafa. It is
elementary that where an allegation in the information is an essential element
of the crime, the same must be proved
beyond reasonable doubt to sustain a conviction. In this case, the
prosecution did not establish specifically and conclusively the fraud alleged
as an element of the offenses charged.